Category Archives: Censorship

Jesse Lee Peterson: WILL YOUTUBE BE CENSORING YOU TOO NEXT?

Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson shreds far-left Big Tech reeking with intolerance

by Jesse Lee Peterson

After Vox host Carlos Maza, a radical homosexual who hates Christian conservatives, wrote a viral Twitter thread whining to YouTube about being harassed by conservative YouTube personality Stephen Crowder and his followers, YouTube demonetized my channel and purged many conservatives on its platform. Just a day earlier, YouTube had said in a series of tweets that Crowder’s alleged harassment of Maza (which consisted of jokes and parodies) did not violate its policies.

YouTube claimed it was updating its policy to ban videos espousing neo-Nazism, “white supremacy” and other “bigoted views.” The company also said it was changing its recommendation algorithm to reduce the spread of misinformation and conspiracy theories.

The censorship of conservative and independent view points by the liberal mainstream media has fostered the massive growth of conservative and alternative voices on YouTube. The tech giant’s attempt to purge these voices should exhort free thinkers to create new and better platforms.

Ironically, YouTube demonetized my channel minutes after taking down two of my videos condemning anti-Jewish hatred by Muslim Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and fringe white extremists who hate Jews. Other influential conservative and independent voices targeted by YouTube for censorship include my friends at PragerU, Stefan Molyneux, Gavin McInnes and others who expose left-wing lunacy and promote American values and exceptionalism. PragerU has filed a lawsuit to stop Google and YouTube from unlawfully censoring its educational videos and discriminating against its right to freedom of speech.

Order Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson’s book, “The Antidote: Healing America from the Poison of Hate, Blame, and Victimhood.”

My channel and many others demonetized by YouTube do not spread hate. Every day on my daily radio broadcast (streamed live on YouTube) I tell people to stop blaming and hating others. I repudiate all hatred, blame, and victimhood. In fact, I wrote an entire book on how to overcome it. I rebuke callers on my radio show who harbor hatred toward Jews, whites, blacks or any other group. I encourage them to drop their anger and forgive so they can go free.

What YouTube is doing is outright censorship. It’s no secret that YouTube and its parent company Google support far-left causes. YouTube supports “gay pride” parades and celebrates homosexual and transgender creators, and its chief executive endorsed Hillary Clinton in the 2016 presidential election. President Trump and other conservatives have openly criticized YouTube and other social media networks for their bias against conservative views, and this latest censorship move is a prime example of their bias.

The “adpocalypse” targeted mostly conservative and right leaning YouTube creators, but it’s being applied in such a broad and sloppy manner that even channels that chronicle historical videos of Nazis have been demonetized or banned for having the footage on their channels.

By demonetizing channels, YouTube is restricting conservative creators from running ads and blocking “Super Chats” (which allows viewers to donate during live streams and have their comments highlighted). YouTube is choking the lifeblood of content creator’s ability to make money off their videos.

The mainstream media and big tech companies like Google and YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and others call conservatives “hateful” while they actively empower and embolden radical LGBT social justice activists who are the real haters. Vox host Carlos Maza and the radical LGBT employee/activists at YouTube who agitated and pressured YouTube to censor and ban conservatives are the true bigots. They always spout off about “love” and “inclusion,” but they are the intolerant and hateful ones.


WND: https://www.wnd.com/2019/06/will-youtube-be-censoring-you-too-next/

Read Jesse Lee Peterson’s Biography

America’s Neo Pravda

 America’s Neo Pravda- “With the election of Donald Trump they are in full-bore emergency mode. ”

by Bill Lockwood

Pravda, the Russian word meaning “Truth”, was the official Communist Party news “filtering” organ of the Soviet Union. As an official arm of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU) Pravda news controlled the flow of information. A dictatorship by definition not only “manages” the entirety of government, but relies heavily upon keeping the sheeple in a state of ignorance by managing what intelligence they are fed.

Signaling how close once-free nations are to totalitarian control—for there is little difference between “managing” your health-care and and “managing” your news-President Obama and German Chancellor Angela Merkel have both openly waged war against “fake news” while recommending some regulatory board for information made available to the public. After all, said Obama, if he had had a diet of anything but the Main Stream Media he would not have voted for himself either! That says it all.

With the shocking election of Donald Trump and the obvious loosening of the hold that the MSM has on the general public, globalists around the world are stepping up their campaign to manage the news for the public. In the words of Merkel, “Today we have fake sites, bots, trolls—things that regenerate themselves, reinforcing opinions with certain algorithms and we have to learn to deal with them.” “We must confront this phenomenon and if necessary, regulate it.”

When Merkel suggested regulation and Obama publicly opined for a “filtering” agency of some sort, they are not willing for these opinions to stand in the free-marketplace of ideas. No. Time for censorship. They are moving to put teeth into some sort of regulation.  The European Union (EU), which Obama openly admires, is doing just that. A non-legislative resolution came out of the EU Parliament last week which calls for the cracking down on “propaganda.” European bureaucrats that fill the EU Parliament are initiating steps to manage the communication flow, for the “public good,” of course.

There is, however, already in place a Neo Pravda in America. Better known as the Main Stream Media, comprised of individual organs such as CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, NPR, The NY Times, The Washington Post, Media Matters, MoveOn.org, MSN, Politico, and The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), these agencies are not simply behaving “childish” or “acting like sore losers.” With the election of Donald Trump they are in full-bore emergency mode.

This is the same news core that yesteryear reported that Mao Tse-Tung was only an “agrarian reformer”—nothing to worry about. Having turned neither right or left, but full-course ahead, this is the same Round Table that decries Trump’s phone call to Free China: Taiwan. This is the same liberal establishment who sent “news” ambassadors to welcome the Bolsheviks into power in Moscow and gave the American public glowing reports of the wonders of collectivism.

This is the same fraternity of “progressives” who initially praised Adolf Hitler for his collective experiment; the same that openly assisted Fidel Castro to be installed as communist dictator in Cuba; the same that openly lied to the American people through voices such as Walter Cronkite about the war in Vietnam; the same that assisted Jimmy Carter to throw Iran to the Ayatollah and Muslim wolves by cutting the Shah’s throat; the same which put Marxist Obama in the oval office without a single dissenting news reporter questioning his credentials.

Behind the façade of “concern” for “fake news” lies an ugly truth. Elitism. Unmitigated, unbounded arrogance. Government leaders, elected or not, consider themselves an aristocracy. The nobility. We know better than you. All men are not created equal; some of us should plan, manage, care for, control and manipulate the others. An oligarchy has arisen and it is evident that the Obama’s and Merkel’s of the world do not consider their positions to be “servants of the people,” but a cabal of upper-crust gentry that wishes to lock the under-class into the steerage of the ship of state.

The Wild Wild West of News

The Wild Wild West of News –“Remember, Obama has actually bragged about lying to the American people…”

by Bill Lockwood

True to his Marxist roots President Obama, in the waning days of his tenure in office, decries what he calls the “wild wild west” of news while suggesting that some agency should have a “curating function” to filter what is “approved” for public consumption. Speaking at a Pittsburgh conference last week, comrade Obama even proposed that “we are going to have to rebuild within this wild-wild-west-of-information flow some sort of curating function that people agree to.” REBUILD? “We”—collectively?

A “curator” calls for someone or agency who is “in charge.” Sometimes it is used for “a guardian” to oversee a minor. This is exactly how Obama sees Americans. The free-flow of information is harmful to minors who need be spoon-fed government-approved information.

Continued the lying dictator-in-chief: “There has to be, I think, some sort of way in which we can sort through information that passes some basic truthiness tests and those that we have to discard, because they just don’t have any basis in anything that’s actually happening in the world.” Remember, Obama has actually bragged about lying to the American people —“If you like your doctor, etc.”

Another government bureaucracy added “to sort” through internet, television, radio, and printed material to apply basic “truthiness” tests. This does not simply sound like the Hitler’s and Stalin’s of the world, it is precisely what their programs of totalitarianism enacted.

As unbelievably astounding as Obama’s proposal is, he continued unfazed: “The way I would like to see us operate is, yes, significant debate and contentious debate, but where we are operating on the same basic platform, same basic rules, on how do we determine what’s true and what’s not. Everything on the internet looks like it might be true. And so in this political season, we’ve seen — you just say stuff. And so everything suddenly becomes contested. That I do not think is good for democracy, and it’s certainly not good for science, for progress, for government, for fixing systems.”

A government-sponsored media-organ would not be “censorship” Obama schmoozed. “But it’s creating places where people can say ‘this is reliable’ and I’m still able to argue safely about facts and what we should do about it.” Only within certain parameters will “vigorous debate” be allowed.

Thomas Jefferson

Respect for the law of the land as well as basic components of liberty is something completely alien to Barack Obama as well as Hillary Clinton. There is an amendment of the Constitution that expressly, in so many words, declares that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.”

The core concept of the Bill of Rights is that people enjoy liberties because they are bestowed upon us by God Himself and that the government created for Americans is forbidden by the people to even touch the hem of the garment of these liberties.

As Thomas Jefferson observed, the fact that several liberties were enumerated in the First Amendment means that “whatever violates either throws down the sanctuary which covers the others” and that “The liberty of speaking and writing … guards our other liberties.”

This election is about liberty. Will we enjoy what remains of that which God has given us in America? Much of it has already been eroded by the government. Or, will we succumb to the comrades of the Democratic Party who would love nothing more than to control you from cradle to grave?

Freedom-loving Americans resent the notion which lies behind all of these Big Brother proposals. It is the assumption that we need government to decide for us what political and religious information we will consume and what we will not. No thanks, Barack, we would rather live in the wild-wild-west of conflicting information and sort it out ourselves than be locked into government-sponsored “safe zones” being fed crumbs that fall from the rich man’s table.

Back to Homepage

Bill Lockwood: Obama’s War Against Freedom of Speech

Internet Giveaway: Obama’s War Against Freedom of Speech-“Hate,” like beauty, is the eye of the beholder. “

by Bill Lockwood

The danger is real. The threat is imminent. Under Barack Obama’s direction the United States is set to give up control of the internet to a world body controlled by other socialists such as himself. Obama’s Marxism is not the armchair sort where he simply cogitates about philosophies of life while puffing on a pipe. “Street-organizing” is called such for a reason.

As these lines are being composed Barack Obama, as has become his modus operandi, via the back door, is seeking to curtail freedom of speech. His proposal is to end the U.S. government’s oversight of the internet domain name system by turning it over to a world body called ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) composed of 162 nations. These nations, composed of dictatorships of the communist or Islamic brands, such as China or Iran, will certainly curtail the precious freedoms long-cherished by Americans.

The Left argues that this “danger” outlined above is overblown. No entity would ever “censor” the internet, we are assured by the globalists. As Senator Ted Cruz observed on the floor of Congress recently, “A representative of Iran is already on record stating, ‘we should not take it [for] granted that jurisdiction is already agreed to be totally based on U.S. law.’” Unbelievable. More unbelievable is the fact that this does not cause Barack Obama to even pause in his internet giveaway. He pushes it onto the fast track.

Further, as Cruz pointed out to the Senate, leading technology companies in the United States have already agreed with the European Union to remove ‘hate speech’ from their online platforms. Giant U.S. companies  are currently in the process of “censoring speech” that is deemed unacceptable. “Hate,” like beauty, is the eye of the beholder. Those who have Twitter or Facebook accounts know that this is already occurring.

Freedom of Speech

America has had a long history of cherishing the precious freedom of speech, the free flow and exchange of ideas. Our framers of government fought long and hard that they and we might enjoy this God-given freedom, which had been stifled throughout the governments of history.

Probably the most significant figure of the Founding period in America is Thomas Jefferson. As were all of those remarkable statesmen called Founding Fathers, Jefferson was a fierce lover of freedom. At his First Inaugural Address (1801) the Sage of Monticello admonished future generations, in memorable phraseology, to carefully guard the Freedom of Speech.

The diffusion of information and arraignment of all abuses at the bar of the public reason; freedom of religion; freedom of the press, and freedom of person under the protection of the habeas corpus, and trial by juries impartially selected. These principles form the bright constellation which has gone before us and guided our steps through an age of revolution and reformation.”

The wisdom of our sages and blood of our heroes have been devoted to their attainment. They should be the creed of our political faith, the text of civic instruction, the touchstone by which to try the services of those we trust; and should we wander from them in moments of error or of alarm, let us hasten to retrace our steps and to regain the road which alone leads to peace, liberty, and safety.”

Elsewhere Jefferson rightly connected the freedom of speech with religion. “…Insomuch that whatever violates either throws down the sanctuary which covers the others” (Kentucky Resolutions, 1798).

Benjamin Franklin warned: “Freedom of speech is a principal pillar of a free government; when this support is taken away, the constitution of a free society is dissolved, and tyranny is erected on its ruins. Republics and limited monarchies derive their strength and vigor from a popular examination into the action of the magistrates.”

Is it the case that this ‘principal pillar of free government’ is near evaporation? Will tyranny indeed be erected on its ruins? Marxist Obama does not cherish this freedom; the liberal establishment does not desire a free flow of ideas. Placing the forum of the internet into globalist hands assures us that tyranny is in the offing.

Back to Homepage